Dalip Singh Saund
My Mother India

IV. THE CASTE SYSTEM OF INDIA

THE CASTE system of India is the most widely discussed subject all
over the world; it is also the least understood. It is really
surprising how little people outside of India know about the
institution of caste, as it was originally evolved and perfected to
form the basis of the country's social, political, and economic
structure. Even students of Hindu philosophy and arts have but a very
dim perception of the meaning of caste. You cannot talk about India
for five minutes to any person without being confronted with the
questions: "How about your caste system? Isn't it true that the upper
classes refuse to marry the untouchables, and even to come into any
kind of physical contact with them? Have not the Brahmans of India
always lorded over the classes for their own benefit? Wouldn't they
seize the power again for their own benefit if the English left India
today? Don't you see that we have given freedom to the negroes in this
country? They have the same political rights as white men to vote and
to hold office in our government. They can come into our homes and do
the cooking for us and we feel no repulsion for them. Would you permit
such association of the classes in India? This equality of spirit is
democracy, and until India gives up her old artistocratic habits and
changes to the new democratic ideals of the age, she will never be
free politically, morally, or spiritually-talk what you will of your
spirituality and ethics."

I have heard such sermons over and over again from Americans of
every status in life. College professors and their wives, university
students, teachers, ministers, shirt dealers, insurance agents,
street-car conductors, bootblacks, and railroad porters have asked me
similar questions. In reply, I do not deny that one class of people is
called "untouchables" and that no other class will intermingle or
intermarry with them. I question most seriously, however, the truth
of the premise of the second statement. Brahmans have not always ruled
the country with purely selfish motives. The priestly class has
wielded immense influence in India's political and social life at
different periods of its history, but they have used their power
mostly for the advancement of its culture and arts. To the Brahmans
we owe in general the elaboration and systematization of Hindu
philosophy. The vast treasures of Hindu literature and fine arts were
both produced and preserved by the same class, who for unknown ages
have been the sole repositories of knowledge in India. They have
abused their authority at several periods, but on such occasions a
great reformer like Buddha or Nanak always appeared among the Hindus
and gave the corrupted priests fresh warning for their mistakes.

The power of the Brahmans was at its lowest when the British
acquired India, and the Brahmans have found in the English rulers of
the country great champions, who have succeeded first in demoralizing
them and then in assisting them to demoralize in turn the rest of
Hindu society. England with its mighty governing hand of steel is the
strongest bulwark of aristocracy in India. And those who say things to
the contrary either do not know the facts or they deliberately
misrepresent them. We shall explain later how the subtle methods of
our foreign rulers work.

Lastly, I do not deny that India needs a reorganization of its
antiquated social system in order to fit properly into the modern
world. Her caste regulations have given to her numerous races and
classes only the negative benefits of peace and order at the expense
of the positive opportunities of expansion and movement. If India is
to live, and if it hopes ever to occupy its proper place among the
family of nations, it must cut out of its system the cancer of
untouchability. However manifest are the evils of India's rigid caste
system and the necessity of its immediate overhauling, the contrast
with America seems so unjust. With typical complacency, the Americans
declare that there is no caste in the United States. Yet the American
negro, although he has a right to vote and to hold office, has
absolutely no opportunity to make use of these privileges. A child of
ten has more chance of beating the world's heavyweight champion in a
prize-fight than an American negro with the highest moral and
educational qualifications has of becoming a governor of the smallest
state in the Union. The world knows that in most states the law
prohibits marriage between whites and negroes, while society
everywhere will, in its own direct and emphatic American way, ban the
union of a white girl to a negro. It is also true that in most states
negro children are taught in separate schools, and that on Sunday
colored people must go for prayer to separate churches. In the South,
the center of the negro population in the United States, negroes must
travel in separate carriages on railroad trains and use separate
waiting rooms at the stations. It is also a matter of history that on
the average more than sixty negroes are lynched in America every year
by mobs for crimes, which if committed under similar conditions by
white persons, would be punished through the regular course of law.

This condition in the United States does not justify the injustice
of caste in India or anywhere else in the world, but it may help to
give the sharp critic of the Hindu system a milder temper in his
judgment by reminding him that human nature everywhere has its virtues
and faults. We shall now proceed to examine the origin and the
function of the caste of India. The Sanskrit word which has been
wrongly translated into caste is Varna, which means color. Thus the
derivation of the term shows that the original classifications in
Hindu society were made on the basis of color or race. [Max Muller.]
When the Aryans first migrated into India, they found themselves face
to face with hordes of savage tribes belonging to inferior and
aboriginal races. The position of those Aryan forefathers was
analogous to that which later confronted the immigrants of Europe into
the continents of America and Australia. While these latter invaders
have sought to simplify their race problems by exterminating the
original inhabitants of these countries, the early Hindus under
similar conditions accepted the inferior races as units in their
social structure and gave them a distinct place in the scale of labor,
the nature of their function being strictly determined according to
their qualification. Even in our present stage of advancement we find
that caste prevails throughout the civilized world. Its ugly symptoms
are most prominent in America, Australia, and the white colonies of
Africa. In the United States, the lynching of negroes in the South and
the strict anti-Asiatic regulations of the state of California, and in
Australia the "Keep Australia white at all cost" spirit among the
population,-both of these show how deeply the spirit of race hatred
has penetrated into the system of the dominant white races of the
world. In the state of California, which is the center of oriental
population in America, law prohibits the Asiatics (Japanese, Chinese,
Hindus) from owning property and even from temporarily leasing lands
for farming purposes. Another statute rules against marriage between
whites and mongolians. The anti-Asiatic land lease regulations of
California have given a severe blow to the oriental population of the
state. The Japanese, Chinese, and Hindu immigrants to the United
States were chiefly agriculturists. In the early days of California
these frugal, honest, hard-working people contributed materially to
the development of agriculture. And the fact cannot well be denied
that the intensely hot regions of the Imperial Valley and the
mosquito-ridden, swampy northern counties were brought under
cultivation almost exclusively through the initiative of the Japanese
and Hindu farmers of California. The Chinese, in conjunction with the
other oriental races, had much to do in developing the largest
asparagus growing region in the world, represented by the deltas of
the Sacramento Valley. Imperial Valley is today the richest vegetable
growing colony in the world. The northern counties produce the finest
qualities of California rice in immense quantities, while the Delta
asparagus has made California's name famous throughout the world as
the producer of the choicest qualities of both white and green
asparagus. But the simple, peace loving, industrious, and retiring
Asiatics who toiled to make the name of agricultural California great
are barred by law from making even an honest, meager living through
farming on a small scale. And all because of the caste of race! As one
of the state senators exclaimed not long ago : "We must keep
California safe from the yellow peril." To which an eminent Hindu
publicist humorously replied: "I have seen no danger of a yellow peril
in California except that of the `Yellow Cabs'."

When a small group of immigrants in any land find themselves
surrounded by an endless environment of barbarous tribes, we grant
that the situation is critical. The small group of Aryan immigrants
in India, however, unlike the American colonists, who exterminated
most of the original inhabitants of the country, sought to assimilate
the barbarous tribes, and hence found themselves confronted with a
difficult problem. They were inspired with the desire to preserve the
purity of their superior race and culture on the one hand, and to
assimilate in their social system the aboriginal races as well as they
could, in order to save them from annihilation. On the other hand,
they felt it necessary to safeguard their race by refusing to
intermarry with people on a lower scale of civilization. The Aryan
forefathers of India, by giving to the original population of [86] the
country a distinct place in its social life, however low, have
preserved them on the one hand from extermination and on the other
from slavery of person. "Was this not the very solution which
suggested itself to the American emancipator Lincoln, when at a much
later date he faced the same problems under similar conditions? That
adjustment of their racial differences that had been declared wise and
that had been practised by the Hindus many thousand years ago, was
at last acknowledged by the leaders of the western world as the only
salvation from their difficult situation." In the meantime, whole
populations had been obliterated, and generation after generation of
human beings had been subjected to the tortures of slavery,-to
injustice and suffering of the most loathsome kind.

Before we judge the Hindu too harshly for refusing to drink the
same water as the non-Aryans and to eat food cooked by their hands, we
must remember that most of the aborigines of India were carrion eaters
and were more unclean than their Aryan neighbors. The Aryan would not
perform any act of life without previously taking his morning bath; he
was scrupulously clean in all his habits. He felt, therefore, that it
was merely a hygienic precaution not to allow the filthy barbarians
access to his person or his house. But it is the nature of caste to
convert temporary inhibitions into permanent barriers. In so far as
the early Hindu sociologists safeguarded the superior Aryan culture by
laying down strict rules-such as the refusals to intermarry and to
drink the same water-, they were in the right. Therein they recognized
the diversity of races and the necessity of keeping separate the most
highly developed and the least civilized. "But they erred most
dangerously in not grasping the fact that differences between human
beings are not fixed like the physical barriers of mountains, but are
mutable and fluid with life's flow." [Tagore.] "It is the law of life
to change its shape and volume through the impact of environment."
"Was it not expected that contact with the civilized Aryans would
develop among the aboriginal inhabitants of India the wholesome
qualities of cleanliness, honesty, peace, and love characteristic of
an advanced race? [Tagore.] To have thus bound in an iron frame the
growing body of a healthy people was not only an intellectual blunder,
but a spiritual crime. As a result, India, which is fundamentally one
nation, is now torn into innumerable castes and communities. And this
is the cause of her degradation and ruin. India, which should be the
mightiest nation of the world today, on account of her ancient culture
and history and the nobility and height of her spiritual idealism, is
now fallen. If there exists anywhere the law of Karma, the Hindus of
the present age are atoning for the sins of omission of their ancient
forefathers. The great, great, great grandchildren of those who denied
their fellow humans the natural rights of humanity have been cast out
of the world's progressive life as the black pariahs of the race. In a
recent decision of the United States Supreme Court, which has ruled
out the natives of India as ineligible to the citizenship of America,
the Honorable Justice remarked: "Hindus of the high caste belonging to
the Aryan or Caucasian race, are not white persons." Those Hindus who
pride themselves as twice-born Brahmans should take notice of this
language.

Let those who wish clamor loud about their Nordic superiority or
Brahmanic purity. What is needed in the world today is not the purity
of the race so much as the purity of the human soul and its
motives. How far the soul of the western people is clean I would not
say, but being myself a Hindu, I do know that the soul of India is
black. By denying to their fellow brethren their rightful position as
human beings, the upper classes of India have sinned most atrociously
against themselves and their gods. "Where the touch from a fellow
human being pollutes and his shadow corrupts, there the gods can never
reside, or truth prevail." The laws of nature are immutable. You may
err against them for a short time, but you cannot afford to ignore
their existence forever. In the ultimate reckoning nature will fall
upon you in a mad fury and wreak for your mistakes a terrible
vengeance. Thus, those who set out to humble and degrade others are in
turn humbled themselves. "In the act of tyranny, the tyrant loses
sight of his ideals and develops the pride of power, which is another
name for the lowering of his soul. Like a man under the influence of
liquor, he may feel for the time powerful and strong; yet from the
moment an individual loses hold of truth, the insanity of cruelty and
injustice starts its deadly work, which will end in his ruin and
death." [Tagore.]

If the Hindus wish to survive, they must first humble themselves
before the members of the lower classes against whom they have long
sinned so terribly. They must purify their souls and promise to sin
no more. Unless they can do this, it is foolish to expect national
freedom, and it is idle to desire it. Those who will not grant freedom
to those below them, are themselves not fitted to have freedom.

The high-born Hindu should think over the situation in which he
finds himself today. When he despises the Mohammedans and the lower
caste Hindus to such an extent that the mere physical touch from the
most highly cultured and clean of their kind will spoil the cooking of
the wretchedest of the so-called high-caste, how in the name of God,
man, or the devil can he expect them to love and serve him? The entire
history of mankind does not afford one instance in which an oppressed
class has fought to protect the honor or power of its oppressors. It
is idle to hope that the oppressed classes of India will ever consent
to shed their life-blood to win the freedom of their country. They may
at some time make immense sacrifices in the service and at the bidding
of such a universal soul as Gandhi, or perhaps unite to drive out an
intensely hated foreigner like the British. True liberation, however,
can be brought to the nation only through the spiritual unity of its
peoples ; under the present social regulations the hope of such a
union is not only visionary but idiotic.

My misguided Hindu brethren of India should remember what the
followers of Nanak, the Sikhs, have already done, and what the Arya
Samajsits are doing now in the Punjab. They can do the same and much
more! If they need a leader to guide them, they can find no one holier
or wiser in the whole world today than Mahatma Gandhi, who will show
them the light as soon as they are ready to see it. Gandhi, the
Mahatma (the Great Soul), the leader of millions, has adopted an
untouchable girl into his family, whom Mrs. Gandhi is bringing up
with their own children in their home. This action has made Gandhi no
smaller in the sight of God or man. Will it make other Hindus smaller
if they come forward and say to their brethren: "Come, brothers, we
embrace you. We shall forget the past and be one again. Children of
the same Father, we are all equal before His law. There shall be, in
future, no high or low among us. Brahman and Sudra, Mohammedan and
Parsi, we shall join hands and strive to bring our motherland back to
its former vigor." Then and then alone will the regeneration of India
be possible.

We find that quite early in the country's history Hindu society
fell into two main divisions, the Aryans and the non-Aryans. The
former were again divided into three orders represented by priests,
warriors, and Aryan farmers or merchants; while the non-Aryans
constituted the servant class or the Sudras. The division of society
into the three priestly, warrior, and merchant classes is a natural
one. We find its parallel in ancient Persia, where the division of the
community into priests, warriors, and husbandmen is shown in the
Avesta. "In fact, the caste sentiment prevails in greater or less
degree in all monarchical countries of the world. In medieval Europe
the sentiment of caste grew so strong that it found expression in literature
and law."

The work of society in India was distributed among the four castes
as follows:

1. Brahmans, the priestly class, were the teachers of the rest of
mankind. Their function was to study the Vedic scriptures and various
branches of knowledge such as science and philosophy. They were to
offer spiritual guidance and to assist all other classes in the
performance of religious rites and ceremonies. Everyone depended upon
them for favor with the gods, for they were believed to be specially
favored to interpret the Veda. As a tribute to the Brahmans'
spirituality and learning, they were respected and loved by the other
classes. Their simple physical needs were amply provided for, so that
they were absolutely free from any form of material care. Within the
realm of their appointed duties they were the free, intellectual lords
of the Universe. This rule applied to the entire class of scholars and
religious teachers, and not to any chosen group among them. A parallel
state of intellectual freedom could be reached in the modern western
world if all of its professors and religious instructors were born
with independent means. The Brahmans' threefold function of teaching,
studying, and renunciation inspired among the masses of mankind the
feelings of reverence and affection for them. "A Brahman's body was on
that account regarded as sacred, and to hurt him in any way was the
heaviest sin; while to kill a Brahman was an unpardonable sin which
could not be expiated even by penance through an unlimited number of
successive rebirths."

While the priestly class thus received the love and homage of the
populace, they at the same time enjoyed many immunities and
exemptions. From certain punishments a Brahman was always exempt, and
his high rank secured him pardon for numerous crimes. On the other
hand, special rules were laid down for his class in order to preserve
its sanctity. "He could never drink, eat meat, or enjoy the coarser
pleasures of life." In fact, the law codes of the different castes
specify that for certain offences a Brahman should be punished many
times more than a man belonging to the lower classes. This severity
was due to the belief of the law-givers of India that "greater
knowledge demanded greater restraint, and that with the raise in a
person's status his responsibility must also rise." The rule for a
Brahman as given by Vasistha is this: "Those are true Brahmans who,
well-taught, have subdued their passions, injure no living being, and
close their fingers when gifts are offered them." Again, the same
teacher has said that a Brahman by birth is not a true Brahman but a
slave unless he lives a virtuous and clean life devoted to study and
restraint. Says Manu, the great law-giver of India: "A Brahman who
does not live as a Brahman is no better than a slave." He could be
made an outcast and demoted socially into a lower rank.

Thus we find that while on the one hand their higher status won for
the Brahmans respect and reverence from the populace, on the other
hand their better position imposed upon them special restraints. It is
difficult for us to realize the wisdom of this dictum, yet the Hindu
law which prohibited its intellectual classes from possessing property
and otherwise amassing wealth was one of the most profoundly wise laws
in the social history of man. Looked at in conjunction with the text
"that a householder obtains high merit in this life and hereafter by
giving food, drink, and raiment to Brahmans," the dictum against the
acquiring of wealth by the Brahman class will appear not only wise
but highly just. "Here was a class of scholars, leaders of mankind,
who were safe from the two great evils which are the curse of their
noble profession-the anxiety of making a livelihood and the temptation
to acquire fortunes."

Lest it be supposed that the scholars of India lived on the charity
of other classes, a condition which is not regarded in the West as
honorable, it may be added here in the form of a corollary that
charity in India has an altogether different meaning from that in the
West. The motives behind such acts in India and the western countries
are quite different. According to Hindu theology, the giver of a gift
and not the recipient is the beneficiary. Absolutely no sense of pride
or self-importance is attached to the bestowing of gifts. Such deeds
are always accompanied by a sense of deep humility and thankfulness in
the heart of the house-holder. "It is the dharma, which may be
translated as the man-ness of man, of every householder to provide
handsomely for the needs of a Brahman, and he does this from a sense
of religious and social duty as well as from a desire for a religious
blessing." It is as much the householder's duty and joy in life to
accommodate a Brahman as it is the hope and delight of every mother to
comfort her child. To assist a strange scholar in his work is
considered no more an act of charity in India than is the support of a
son at college in Europe or America. The experiences of Mrs. Margaret
E. Noble, an Englishwoman of literary eminence, who went to India for
a study of its philosophy, are illustrative of the Hindu psychology
in this matter. She relates in her book The Web of Indian Life the
story of her residence in the Hindu section of Calcutta. After news
reached the neighborhood that she had come to India as a student, she
found in front of her door one morning a jar of fresh milk and a
basket of provisions left by some unknown visitor. This experience
was repeated almost every day of the year until her departure. Yet the
donors of these simple presents never made themselves known to Mrs.
Noble, nor was she ever questioned by anyone of her neighbors
regarding her views on Hindu life. They did not care whether she was
friendly or hostile to them in her judgments. The fact that she had
come among them as a student was sufficient reason for them to provide
for her. India is the only country in the world where poets and
priests never starve.

2. Khashatriyas or the royal and military class were the rulers of
the country, and their duty was to protect the other classes. The
Khashatriyas constituted the knightly caste of India. They were
brave and chivalrous. The enjoyment of the senses and of pleasures
subject to such laws as may protect the weak from the strong were the
legitimate rewards of this class. Many a deed of extreme heroism
committed by this class under the noble impulse to protect justice or
to serve Cupid is related in the epic history of India.

"Chivalry taught them the lessons of gaiety and enjoyment. They
learned to admire and desire beauty. Unlike the austere ascetic
Brahmans, passion and pleasure in the company of woman was sought by
the gallant suitors of the warrior class. Women were often objects of
jealousy, and they always exercised great power through their beauty
and charm. Fine, full-blooded creatures they were, who knew how to get
and give love. Both men and women loved superbly and
passionately. Their passions were strong and consuming and their
thirst for love great." Theirs was a love about which a poet sung:

"Give me your love for a day,
A night, an hour;
If the wages of sin are death,
I am willing to pay.

Oh! Aziza, whom I adore,
Aziza, my one delight,
Only one night-I will die before day,
And trouble your life no more."
(LAWRENCE HOPE.)[Quoted from Otto Rothfield-Women of India.]

3. The Vaishya or the merchant and husbandman class constituted the
body of the people. Theoretically they were the equals of the other
classes of the Aryan family; but "practically this class together with
the fourth caste, namely the Sudras, formed the majority of the
population, whose duty it was to support and serve the two upper
classes." They managed the business life of the country and were
responsible for the maintenance of the other classes. They tilled the
soil and managed the entire commercial and industrial affairs of the
land. This class was again subdivided into various groups according to
their profession. This classification of the middle class of India on
the basis of occupation was founded upon a thorough understanding of
the laws of heredity-"the purpose being to develop the best qualities
through heredity transmission. Thereby an attempt was made to develop
further the brain of the scholar, the skill of the craftsman, and
the ingenuity of the trader through the cumulative influence of
careful selection from generation to generation." By thus shutting
different trades and professions into air-tight compartments the
Vaishya deprived themselves of the benefits of the infusion of young
blood into the old system. While on the one: hand it had the wholesome
effect of reducing the evils. of competition to the minimum, on the
other it has, gradually tended "to turn arts into crafts and genius
into skill."

4. Sudras or the servant class constituted the entire aboriginal
non-Aryan population of the country, whose function was to do
mechanical service in the household life of the community. According
to Manu the highest merit for this class was to serve faithfully the
other three classes. The Sudras performed the most degrading tasks,
and were allowed to come into contact with the Aryan population only
as menials. On account of their filthy habits these aboriginals were
not allowed a close approach to the persons of the higher
classes-hence the origin of the term "untouchable. Yet the fact
stands that even the "untouchables" are members of the Hindu family
group. At marriages and other festivals gifts are freely exchanged
between them and the upper classes. For a householder it is equally
important to participate in the ceremonies of the village
"untouchables" and his own cousins. I remember very clearly how as a
young boy I was instructed by my mother to bow each morning before
every elder member of the family, nor forgetting the servants, or
Sudras.

Bhagavad Gita, the Bible of the Hindus, lays down the following
rules for the different castes of India:

"The duties of the Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, as also of
Sudras, are divided in accordance with their nature-born
qualities. Peace, self-restraint, austerities, purity, forgiveness,
and uprightness, knowledge, direct intuition, and faith in God
are the natural qualities of the Brahmin. Of the Kshatriyas,
bravery, energy, fortitude, dexterity, fleeing not in battle, gift
and lordliness are the nature-born qualities. Agriculture,
protection of cows, merchandise, and various industries are the
nature-born duties of the Vaishyas. Conscientiousness in menial
service is the nature-born duty of the Sudras. A man attains
perfection by performing those duties which he is able to do."

This division of duties among the different castes "in accordance
with their nature-born qualities" needs special notice. We find here
that the original distinctions between different classes were made on
the basis of their natural qualifications. "The purpose of the early
Hindu sociologists was to design a society in which opportunity was
allowed to everyone for only such experience as his mental and
spiritual status was capable." [E.W.Hopkins.] In the beginning, castes
were not fixed by iron barriers, nor were the occupations and
professions of the people hereditary. There was freedom for expansion,
and everyone enjoyed the privilege of rising into the higher scales of
social rank through a demonstration of his power and ability to do
so. It is a curious fact of Hindu history that nearly all of its
incarnations,-namely, Buddha, Rama, Krishna-belonged to the second or
military caste. But the Hindu castes had already lost their flexible
natures as early as the sixth century B.C., when Buddha once again
preached the doctrines of equality to all classes of people. Through
the influence of Buddhist teachings and for over a thousand years
during which Buddhism reigned over India, artificial hereditary caste
divisions among peoples were almost entirely demolished and forgotten.
"Buddha gave to the spirit of caste a death-blow. He refused to admit
differences between persons because of their color or race. He would
not recognize a Brahman because he was born a Brahman. On the other
hand lie distinguished between people according to their intellectual
status and moral worth." [E.W.Hopkins.] He who possessed the qualities
of "peace, self-restraint, self- control, righteousness, devotion,
love for humanity, and divine wisdom" was alone a true Brahman. To the
Buddhist, caste was less important than character. His Jataka tales
preached this doctrine in a simple but highly eloquent manner:

"It is not right
To call men white
Who virtue lack;
For it is sin
And not the skin
That makes men black.
Not by the cut of his hair,
Not by his clan or birth,
May a Brahmin claim the Brahmin's name,
But only by moral worth."
[Jataka, 440. Quoted from E.W.Hopkins Ethics of India.]

About 600 A. D. however, when Buddhism declined and the Brahmans
regained their power, caste was once again established on the old
hereditary lines. Since that time the influence of the vicious system
has prevailed, except when it was checked by such teachers as Chitin
who have regularly appeared at critical periods of the country's
history. Nanak's influence in modern times has been the strongest in
breaking down the barriers of caste. He was born near Lahore (Punjab)
in the year 1469 A.D. and became the founder of the Sikh religion. He
recognized the equality of all human beings, irrespective of their
color, rank, or sex. In one of his most popular verses he says:

"One God produced the light, and all creatures are of His
creation. When the entire universe has originated from one source,
why do men call one good and the other bad?"

Even in the present day the followers of Nanak are a tremendous
force in demolishing caste. In a recent general assembly of the Sikhs
held at Amritsar (the official headquarters of the Sikh religion) it
was announced that at all future gatherings of the community, and in
all of its free kitchens everywhere, cooks belonging to the
"untouchable" class shall be freely employed and even given special
preference. As a beginning of this policy the usual pudding offering
of the Sikhs was distributed by "untouchable" men and women to a group
of nearly twenty thousand delegates at the convention. Prior to this,
resolutions condemning "untouchability" had been passed on innumerable
occasions at social service conferences; but never before had the
ages-old custom been trampled upon, in a practical way, by any other
community belonging to the Hindu religion. May this auspicious
beginning inaugurate a triumphant conclusion. It is sincerely hoped
that the leadership of Gandhi and the virile followers of Nanak in
removing the curse of "untouchability" will soon be recognized by the
entire Hindu community. This alone could insure the enthusiastic Hindu
nationalists political economic freedom for their country. Had it not
been for the selfishness of the Brahmans during the mediaeval
period,-a selfishness which has tended to segregate the Hindus into
different sections through the strict caste restrictions of various
types,-India would occupy today the vanguard of the world's progress
instead of the rear. In spite of her present weakness India possesses,
however, within herself a marvelous reserve force which will enable
her to pass through this crisis. While the haughty West, which has
always delighted in taunting the Hindus for the latter's caste, has
not even begun to examine her problem of race-conflict, India is
already on its way to solving her own caste problem. Gradually, as the
younger generation among the Hindus gains more power, "untouchability"
and its allied diseases will disappear. Personally, I believe that
the leaders of India are headed in the right direction, and that soon
equality among members of the different castes will be established in
the country as a permanent part of its social structure.

"In the Hindu system, once the people were divided into
different castes, equality of opportunity for all pre vailed
within their own castes, while the caste or group as a whole had
collective responsibilities and privileges." Each caste had its
own rules and code of honor; and so long as a man's mode of living
was acceptable to his caste-fellows, the rest of the community did
not care about it at all. On the other hand, a man's status in the
outside world or his wealth made no change in his rank within the
caste. I shall offer an illustration from my own experience. During
the mourning week after the death of a near relative of His Royal
Highness, the ruling Prince of the native State of Kashmir, Her
Royal Highness gave a state reception to the sympathizing
friends. Whereas she greeted the wives of the two highest officials
in the State, the English Resident and the Prime Minister, with a
nod of the head from her seat, Her Royal Highness had to receive
standing the humble housekeeper in my brother's home, because the
latter belonged to the same caste as the ruling prince. "Society
thus organized can be best described by the term Guild Socialism."

Another distinctive feature in the study of its caste is the
communal character of Hindu life. Hindu society was established on a
basis of group morality. No set of rules were held binding on all
classes alike, but within a given caste the freedom of the individual
was subordinated to the interest of the caste. Men lived not for their
own interests or comfort, but for the benefit of the community. It was
a life of self-sacrifice, and the concept of duty was paramount. The
good of caste, of race, of nation stood first, and that of the
individual second. Social welfare was placed before the happiness of
the individual. "For the family sacrifice the individual, for the
community the family, for the country the community, for the soul all
the world."

Which of the two ideals, the communism of the Hindu or the
individualism of the Westerner is the better? Says Rabindranath
Tagore: "Europe may have preached and striven for individualism, but
where else in the world is the individual so much of slave?"

On the other hand it must be remembered also that all ideals are
good only so far as they assist the individual to develop his full
manhood, and the moment they begin to hamper him in his natural growth
and thwart his own will they lose their value. So long as the caste
regulations of the Hindus assisted them in their spiritual
development, they were justified. But the moment they began to lose
their original character and became an oppression in the hands of the
priestly classes, who used their authority to stifle the nation's
spirit, they had lost their usefulness and invited the ridicule and
censure of all intelligent thinkers.

Where finer feelings of fraternal human-fellowship prevailed over
self-interest and individual gain, in such a community no voice cried
in vain at the time of distress. When deaths in the family left small
children parentless, or sickness and misfortunes made homes penniless,
the protection of other members of the caste was always available for
those in need. Orphans and helpless members within the caste were
taken into the homes of caste brothers and carefully brought up and
fed with the rest as members of the family. Here the lucky and the
unlucky were brought up side by side. Thus there has never arisen in
India the necessity of orphanages and poorhouses. As was said by an
eminent English writer: [Margaret E. Noble.] "For to the ripe and
mellow genius of the East it has been always clear that the
defenceless and unfortunate require a home, not a barrack."

Let us now review the entire subject of caste thus: The Aryan
invaders of India found themselves surrounded by hordes of aboriginal
and inferior races. Under similar conditions the European invaders of
America and Australia exterminated the original population by killing
them off, or converted them into human slaves; the Hindu Aryans
avoided both of these inhumanities by taking the native inhabitants of
the land into their social life. They gave these inferior peoples a
distinct place in the scale of labor, and assigned to them the
duties of menial service, for which alone they were qualified at the
time. Further, to safeguard their superior culture, the Aryan leaders
laid down strict rules against intermarriage with their non-Aryan
neighbors. And as these aboriginals were filthy in their habits and
mostly carrion-eaters, it was also ordained as a measure of hygienic
precaution that the Aryans should not be allowed to drink the same
water or eat food cooked by non-Aryan hands. This was the beginning of
untouchability.

Simultaneously with this racial division rose a functional division
among the Aryan population separating it into three orders of priests,
warriors, and husbandmen. This constituted the four-fold division of
the Hindu caste system-the Aryan inhabitants of the land forming the
first three castes of Brahmans, Khashatriyas, and Vaishyas, while
the non-Aryans constituted the fourth caste of servants or Sudras. At
first these divisions into different castes were flexible and persons
in the lower castes were allowed to rise into the ones higher by
virtue of their merit. We find that most of the historic religious
teachers of the Hindus, namely, Rama, Krishna, and Buddha, came from
the second class.

Gradually, however, the castes began to lose their flexible nature,
and before the birth of Buddha in the year 600 B. C. they had already
acquired a hereditary character. The teachings of Buddhism had the
tendency to break down the hereditary barriers of caste, and during a
thousand years of its reign the people of India had forgotten their
caste boundaries. "Around 600 A. D. Buddhism began to decline and the
Brahman priests gained fresh prestige. They set up the different
castes on the old hereditary lines once again, and, except for a few
local breaks through the appearance of such leaders as Nanak in Punjab
and Chaityna in the South, the spirit of caste has prevailed
throughout Hindu India since the decline of Buddhism." The greatest
champion of the lower classes who has appeared in recent times is the
peaceful leader of India's silent revolution, Mahatma Gandhi. He has
spoken and written against untouchability and its allied evils more
bitterly and longer than against other vital political and economic
wrongs of the country. He has told his countrymen time and again that
India's soul cannot become pure so long as untouchability stays
amongst the Hindus to defile it. And as a proof of his own sincerity
in the matter he has adopted in his own family an untouchable girl
whom he calls the joy of the household.

The evils of caste are quite manifest. It has tended to divide the
Hindu community into various groups and thus destroyed among them
unity of feeling which alone could insure national strength. Lack of
united power opened the way for foreign invasions, which, again, has
resulted in dragging India down from her former place of glory to her
present state of humiliation and ruin. Yet alongside with the many
evils of India's caste system several advantages have accrued from
it. Its existence has tended to make the people of India conservative
and tolerant. With the institution of caste they felt so well
fortified within themselves that they did not fear the influx of new
ideas into their midst. India offered a safe and welcome home to the
oppressed minorities from other lands. The Parsis and Jews came and
settled there. They were not merely tolerated but welcomed by the
Hindus, because the latter, assured of their own wonderful powers of
resistance, had nothing to fear from outside influences. The Hindu
caste system may be described as "the social formulation of defence
minus all elements of aggression." Since the beginning of her history
India has been subjected to numerous invasions, but she has stood
against them successfully. In the cultural sense India, instead of
being conquered, "has always succeeded in conquering her conquerors."
The invaders belonging to different civilizations and races have come
and disappeared, one after the other; but India still survives.

Again, in the Hindus' scheme of the division of labor care was
taken to assign to every man his task and remuneration in such a
manner as to avoid all unnecessary friction among the different
classes. Its value will be readily recognized by those who are
familiar with the evils of modern industrialism, arising from the
intense hatred within the different classes.

Finally, it must be said to the credit of Hindu sociologists that,
at least, they had the courage to face the problem of race-conflict
with a sympathetic mind. The problem was not of their creation. The
diversity of races existed in India before these new Aryan invaders
came into the country. The caste system of the Hindus was the result
of their sincere endeavors to seek a solution of their difficult
problem. Its object was to keep the different races together and yet
afford each one of them opportunity to express itself in its own
separate way. "India may not have achieved complete success in
this. But who else has? It was, at least, better than the best which
the West has thought of so far. There the stronger races have either
exterminated the weaker ones like the Red Indians in America, or shut
them out completely like the Asiatics in Australia and America."
"Whatever may be its merits," says Tagore, "you will have to admit
that it does not spring from the higher impulses of civilization,
but from the lower passions of greed and hatred."